17 Mar 2023法庭線#6177
Stand News Sedition Case | Prosecutor Says Reporter Guided Baggio Leung in Answering Questions; Chung Pui-kuen Calls It Ordinary Interview Technique
控方圍繞涉案梁頌恆及張崑陽的文章盤問，指記者林彥邦訪問梁頌恆時，「諗啲嘢開條路畀佢答」，以顯示其感愧疚，鋪排他有承擔和勇敢。鍾沛權表示，記者一般會協助被訪者完整說出感受，並非特殊技巧，亦會提問讀者感興趣的內容。控方又指，《立場》在一日內，以報道及全文方式刊出張崑陽被通緝的回應，是想讀者「睇完又睇」、達到煽動效果；鍾均不同意。
另外，早前法官郭偉健以唐英傑申請人身保護令為例，指博客作者區家麟應先看判詞再評論，控方周五呈上《立場》相關報道。法官質疑報道，無提及判詞稱指定法官符合國際標準，控方亦指報道僅「三、兩句總結」指定法官不影響司法獨立。鍾解釋，當時傳媒沒將焦點放在指定法官，又指「檢控官你都無主動引述，都係法官提醒先有」。案件下周一（20 日）續審。
The prosecution questioned Chung Pui-kuen about articles concerning Baggio Leung and Brian Leung. It alleged that when reporter Lam Yin-pong interviewed Baggio Leung, he “thought of things to open a way for him to answer”, in order to show that Leung felt guilty and portray him as responsible and courageous. Chung said reporters generally help interviewees fully express their feelings, that this was not a special technique, and that reporters also ask about matters of interest to readers. The prosecution also alleged that Stand News published Brian Leung’s response to being wanted both as a report and in full on the same day in order to have readers “read it and read it again” and achieve a seditious effect. Chung disagreed on both points.
Separately, after Judge Kwok Wai-kin earlier cited Tong Ying-kit’s application for a writ of habeas corpus as an example and said blogger Koo Ka-lin should read the judgment before commenting, the prosecution submitted relevant Stand News reports on Friday. The judge questioned the reports for not mentioning that the judgment said the designated judges met international standards. The prosecution also said the reports only gave a “two- or three-sentence summary” that the designated judges did not affect judicial independence. Chung explained that the media had not focused on the designated judges at the time, adding: “The prosecutor did not proactively quote it either; it was only after the judge reminded you that you did.” The trial will resume next Monday (the 20th).
16 Mar 2023獨媒#6169
Jimmy Lai’s son urges UN to address case and help secure his release; Hong Kong Government: judicial interference will not be tolerated
聯合國人權事務委員會正在日內瓦開會，壹傳媒創辦人黎智英的國際法律團隊及他的兒子黎崇恩前日（14日）向委員會，指黎正被長時間關押，因為堅守言論自由而面對可能終身監禁，呼籲聯合國譴責並盡力讓黎獲釋。港府昨發聲明強烈反對境外勢力干預涉及《香港國安法》案件的司法程序。
The United Nations Human Rights Committee is meeting in Geneva. The international legal team of Next Digital founder Jimmy Lai and his son, Lai Chung-yan, told the committee on the 14th that Lai had been detained for a prolonged period and could face life imprisonment for upholding freedom of expression. They urged the United Nations to condemn the situation and do its utmost to secure Lai’s release. The Hong Kong Government issued a statement yesterday strongly opposing interference by external forces in judicial proceedings involving cases under the Hong Kong National Security Law.
16 Mar 2023法庭線#6173
47-Defendant Case | New Territories East Agreement Said Veto Power “Would Be Used”; Au Nok-hin Says He Only Saw It in Court and Felt Benny Tai Had Hijacked the Objections
47 名民主派被控「串謀顛覆國家政權」罪一案，周四（16 日）展開第 26 天審訊。辯方庭上披露，由戴耀廷發出的初選新界東協議文件中，有「會運用」《基本法》否決權的字句。
區諾軒供稱「我都係啱啱睇到」。被問及戴是否騎劫了反對意見時，區稱「我確實係有呢個感覺」，他亦確認，會上社民連陳寶瑩及他本人都曾對否決預算案一事提出質疑。區又確認，他與戴均沒就初選諮詢陳志全，亦不清楚陳知否會上就否決預算案的爭議。
區作供時，另提到認為「五大訴求」難以完全實現，稱「政治始終係要有談判同埋妥協」，又指情況「接近一個死局」。他舉例指，按他理解一班大學校長曾與特首商討「成立獨立調查委員會」，但終未能實現。案件周五續審。
The trial of 47 pro-democracy figures charged with “conspiracy to subvert state power” entered its 26th day on Thursday (16th). The defence disclosed in court that a New Territories East primary election agreement document issued by Benny Tai included wording that the Basic Law veto power “would be used.”
Au Nok-hin testified, “I only just saw it myself.” Asked whether Tai had hijacked the opposing views, Au said, “I certainly had that feeling.” He also confirmed that League of Social Democrats member Chan Po-ying and he had both questioned the proposal to veto the budget at the meeting. Au further confirmed that neither he nor Tai had consulted Ray Chan about the primary election, and that he did not know whether Chan was aware of the dispute at the meeting over vetoing the budget.
In his testimony, Au also said he believed the “five demands” would be difficult to achieve in full, saying, “Politics ultimately requires negotiation and compromise.” He described the situation as “close to a deadlock.” As an example, he said that, according to his understanding, a group of university presidents had discussed the “establishment of an independent commission of inquiry” with the Chief Executive, but it ultimately failed to materialise. The trial will continue on Friday.
15 Mar 2023法庭線#6167
Stand News sedition case｜Prosecution questions Chinese subtitles on interview video: “For people who don’t speak Cantonese?” Chung Pui-kuen calls it basic setup
控方第 20 日盤問鍾沛權，圍繞涉案羅冠聰的專訪，質疑報道刻意鋪排美化羅冠聰。鍾否認，指專訪是想立體呈現羅的最新情況，流亡英國後的遭遇和感受。控方另質疑專訪的影片配上中文字幕，「係做畀世界各地識中文但唔識廣東話嘅人睇？例如台灣？」鍾指此做法屬影像報道的基本配置，幫助觀眾理解和吸收。
至於涉案許智峯專訪，控方質疑《立場》為許推廣「國際線」及「賣廣告」，鍾指說法不公平，專訪僅交代受訪者背景，「咁你可以話所有媒體都幫緊任何新聞人物賣廣告」。案件周五（17 日）續審。
On the 20th day of the prosecution’s cross-examination of Chung Pui-kuen, the prosecution focused on an interview with Nathan Law in the case and questioned whether the report had deliberately arranged to portray Law in a favourable light. Chung denied this, saying the interview was intended to present a rounded picture of Law’s latest circumstances, as well as his experiences and feelings after going into exile in the United Kingdom. The prosecution also questioned why the interview video had Chinese subtitles, asking whether they were “for people around the world who know Chinese but do not speak Cantonese—for example, people in Taiwan?” Chung said this was a basic configuration for video reporting, helping viewers understand and absorb the content.
Regarding an interview with Ted Hui in the case, the prosecution questioned whether Stand News was promoting Hui’s “international line” and “selling advertising”. Chung said this was unfair, saying the interview merely explained the interviewee’s background. “Then you could say that all media are helping every news figure sell advertising,” he said. The hearing will continue on Friday (17th).
14 Mar 2023法庭線#6157
47-person case | Au Nok-hin agrees wording on actively using power to veto budget was not a consensus; Wong Pik-wan and Lam Cheuk-ting did not sign “Ink Falls Without Regret”
47 名民主派被控「串謀顛覆國家政權」罪一案，周二（14 日）展開第 24 天審訊。區諾軒在代表黃碧雲及林卓廷的大狀沈士文盤問下，確認黃、林沒在初選提名表夾附含否決預算案字句的共同綱領，而兩人與「成個民主黨都無簽」〈墨落無悔〉聲明。
區早前供稱戴耀廷在各區協調協議文件，加入「積極運用《基本法》權力，否決《財政預算案》」字句，沈士文引用區與警會面錄影盤問下，區指出戴曾稱「積極運用」字眼能為政黨保留不否決的空間。區又同意字句是由戴為促進討論、平衡分歧而加入，並非與會者的共識。
區作供時，又主動提及民主黨、社民連等託付於他，他對未能維護初選多元聲音「覺得好內疚」。法官追問區與戴角色，區稱戴「負責咗好大部分」，包括論述及組織工作，自己則負責聯絡溝通、論壇等。他又稱「三投三不投」不屬大會，其支出亦不包括在初選財政之中。
The 24th day of the trial of 47 pro-democracy figures charged with conspiracy to subvert state power began on Tuesday (the 14th). Under questioning by the barrister representing Wong Pik-wan and Lam Cheuk-ting, Erik Ignatius Sze Man Shum, Au Nok-hin confirmed that Wong and Lam had not attached to their primary-election nomination forms a joint manifesto containing wording on vetoing the budget, and that neither they nor “the entire Democratic Party” had signed the “Ink Falls Without Regret” declaration.
Au had earlier testified that Tai Yiu-ting added the wording “actively use the powers under the Basic Law to veto the Appropriation Bill” to coordination-agreement documents for the various districts. Citing video footage of Au’s meeting with police, Erik Ignatius Sze Man Shum questioned Au, who said Tai had stated that the wording “actively use” left political parties room not to veto the bill. Au also agreed that Tai had added the wording to facilitate discussion and balance differences, and that it was not a consensus among those attending.
While testifying, Au also volunteered that the Democratic Party, the League of Social Democrats and others had entrusted him with responsibilities, and that he “felt very guilty” at being unable to preserve diverse voices in the primary election. The judge asked further about Au’s and Tai’s roles. Au said Tai had “handled a very large part” of the work, including advocacy and organisational work, while Au was responsible for liaison, communication and forums. He also said “Three Votes, Three No Votes” was not part of the assembly, and that its expenditure was not included in the primary-election finances.
14 Mar 2023法庭線#6158
Stand News sedition case｜Judge questions whether Koo should read judgment before commenting; Chung says it was unnecessary
控方第 19 日盤問鍾沛權，質疑資深傳媒人區家麟不相信共產黨、《國安法》和「一國兩制」。鍾認為，區是憂慮本港愈見接近極權社會，公民權利被剝奪，而對法例作出警惕和批評。法官郭偉健問及，區是否應先閱讀判詞等資料才作出評論；鍾認為無必要，「當然你話評論質素夠唔夠高、公唔公道可以討論」，而他亦不覺得區的質疑基礎薄弱、不堪一擊。
控方另將《立場》於《國安法》通過翌日的文章分類，指大部分屬「負面」內容。當中引述官員說法的報道，被控方歸類為「中性」，遭辯方質疑準則不一致，「報道批評《國安法》係負面，贊成《國安法》就係中性？」辯方又認為，負面批評與煽動無關，無助證明涉案文章屬煽動。案件周三（15 日）續審。
On the prosecution’s 19th day of cross-examining Chung Pui-kuen, it questioned him on whether veteran media figure Koo Ka-lam did not believe in the Communist Party, the National Security Law and “one country, two systems”. Chung said Koo was concerned that Hong Kong was becoming increasingly like a totalitarian society, with civil rights being taken away, and was issuing warnings and criticism about the law. Judge Kwok Wai-kin asked whether Koo should first read the judgment and other materials before commenting. Chung said this was unnecessary: “Of course, you can discuss whether the quality of the comments is high enough and whether they are fair.” He also did not consider the basis of Koo’s questions to be weak or unable to withstand challenge.
The prosecution also classified Stand News articles published the day after the National Security Law was passed, saying most contained “negative” content. Reports quoting officials were classified by the prosecution as “neutral”, prompting the defence to question whether the criteria were inconsistent: “Reporting criticism of the National Security Law is negative, while supporting the National Security Law is neutral?” The defence also argued that negative criticism was unrelated to sedition and could not help prove that the articles in question were seditious. The trial will continue on Wednesday (15th).
14 Mar 2023獨媒#6161
Police National Security Department Arrests Two over Possession of Seditious Publications
警方國安處昨日（3月13日）與海關採取聯合行動，拘捕兩人，涉嫌管有煽動刊物，違反香港法例第200章《刑事罪行條例》第10（2）條，現正被扣留調查，據悉涉及的刊物的「羊村」繪本。
The Police National Security Department and Customs conducted a joint operation yesterday (March 13), arresting two people suspected of possessing seditious publications in violation of Section 10(2) of Cap. 200, the Crimes Ordinance. They are currently being detained for investigation. It is understood that the publications involved were “Sheep Village” picture books.
11 Mar 2023獨媒#6151
Elizabeth Yin Ngor Tang Granted $200,000 Bail, Says Arrest Was Inexplicable
前職工盟秘書長李卓人的妻子鄧燕娥，在周四（3月9日）到赤柱監獄探望丈夫後，在門外被警方國安處人員拘捕。她被指涉違反「勾結境外勢力危害國家安全」罪，今日（11日）獲准以20萬元保釋，並交出旅遊證件，不准離港。
Elizabeth Yin Ngor Tang, the wife of former Hong Kong Confederation of Trade Unions secretary-general Lee Cheuk-yan, was arrested outside Stanley Prison by officers from the police National Security Department after visiting her husband there on Thursday (March 9). She was alleged to have been involved in the offence of “colluding with external forces to endanger national security”. Today (March 11), she was granted bail of $200,000 and surrendered her travel documents. She is barred from leaving Hong Kong.
10 Mar 2023獨媒#6140
47-person primary election case: Au Nok-hin says his original intention in organising primary differed from Benny Tai; after “Ink Without Regrets”, Democratic Party maintained stance against indiscriminately vetoing budget bills
47人涉組織及參與民主派初選，被控「串謀顛覆國家政權」罪，16人不認罪，今（10日）踏入審訊第23天。區諾軒接受代表民主黨黃碧雲和林卓廷的大狀盤問，同意與戴耀廷就初選目標有分歧，他的「初心」只是協調民主派爭取立會過半，惟戴耀廷則較着重運用否決權，亦承認組織者對如何爭五大訴求「傾唔到一個有效嘅策略」。被問是否同意將否決權與「35+」綑綁，區承認「終歸冇反對」，指當時未立《國安法》，「我的確冇為意到當時候呢一啲嘅主張，係會觸犯法例。」區又同意，民主黨在「墨落無悔」發布後，仍維持不會無差別否決預算案的立場，他亦不知道林卓廷和黃碧雲有否收到相關協調機制文件。
The 47 defendants were charged with conspiracy to subvert state power over organising and participating in the pro-democracy primary election. Sixteen have pleaded not guilty, and today (the 10th) marked the 23rd day of the trial. Au Nok-hin was cross-examined by counsel representing Democratic Party members Lam Cheuk-ting and Wong Pik-wan. He agreed that he and Benny Tai differed over the primary’s objectives: his “original intention” was only to coordinate the pro-democracy camp in seeking a majority in the Legislative Council, while Tai placed greater emphasis on using veto power. He also acknowledged that the organisers “could not agree on an effective strategy” for pursuing the five demands. Asked whether he agreed that veto power should be linked to “35+”, Au acknowledged that he “ultimately did not object”, saying that the National Security Law had not yet been enacted and, “I indeed did not realise at the time that these propositions would violate the law.” Au also agreed that after the Democratic Party issued “Ink Without Regrets”, it maintained its position that it would not indiscriminately veto budget bills. He also did not know whether Lam Cheuk-ting and Wong Pik-wan had received the relevant coordination-mechanism documents.
10 Mar 2023法庭線#6141
47-case | Au Nok-hin: Yang Hoi-ying’s running after losing was contrary to consensus; does not rule out misremembering that Lawrence Wai Chung Lau attended coordination meeting
47 名民主派被控「串謀顛覆國家政權」罪一案，周五展開第 23 天審訊，再多 6 名被告確認完成對區諾軒的盤問（區作供重點見內文表）。當中，區供稱楊雪盈於初選落敗後參選立法會，有違「35+」共識，指因她非指定的替補人選。
出選九西、自辯的劉偉聰，盤問時指自己沒如區早前供稱，有出席提及過否決預算案的一次地區協調會議，區稱「唔排除」是自己記錯。區接受同屬九西的何啟明代表大狀盤問時，供稱該次會議戴耀廷「單向介紹」否決權，而九西的 4 項共識，均與否決預算案無關。
The 23rd day of the trial of 47 pro-democracy figures charged with conspiracy to subvert state power began on Friday. Six more defendants confirmed that they had completed cross-examining Au Nok-hin (see the table in the main text for key points of Au’s testimony). Au testified that Yang Hoi-ying ran for the Legislative Council after losing the primary election, contrary to the “35+” consensus, because she was not the designated substitute candidate.
Lawrence Wai Chung Lau, who ran in Kowloon West and is representing themself, said during cross-examination that, contrary to Au’s earlier testimony, they had not attended a district coordination meeting at which vetoing the budget was discussed. Au said he “could not rule out” having misremembered. Under cross-examination by senior counsel representing Ho Kai-ming, who also ran in Kowloon West, Au testified that Benny Tai “unilaterally introduced” veto power at that meeting, while the four Kowloon West consensus points were all unrelated to vetoing the budget.
Translations are supplied by the source workbook. Consult the original reporting for context.
